I have been shown the value of speaking out. A correspondent writes:



Some of these so-called �angry atheists� whom my correspondent calls �the new crop of atheist authors� and �modern pioneers of atheist activists� are Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris. Another word used to describe these people, esp. Dawkins, is �arrogant.� Were it the Christians who used these derogatory terms it would be understandable, but it�s nonreligious people. These nonreligious people are always bashing religion, so why do they also bash their fellow atheists and skeptics�individuals who speak out to make the world a better place for the nonreligious?

Maybe they think respectful silence promotes a better image. Silent dignity. It can be impressive in the proper situation. However, we live in an era in which fundamentalist religion is a physical threat not only to the human species but to the planet as a whole. Nonreligious people are a special target of fundamentalist religion. Discrimination against nonreligious people can impact where and what we work, where we live, with whom we can interact socially. It can lead to physical violence and death.

Not to mention the psychological abuse. Under-age deconverts dependent on Christian parents can face eviction from the parental home if they talk about their convictions. Adults can be shunned from the family table, divorced by their spouses, and disowned by immediate family. Whether the excommunication is formal or informal, the consequences are debilitating for the victims. It is time to speak out.

Speaking out, as my correspondent notes, forces Christians to become aware of our existence. It is consciousness raising. It is no longer possible to ignore our existence and deny our presence as fully human beings who can think, reason, debate, and defend our position. The women�s movement and the gay-rights promoters before us have used these techniques. They have accomplished recognition and rights not before known to them. While sexual minorities are still a fringe community, due to the sweat, blood, and tears of earlier generations, today they have the legal right to life as free citizens. Women today are recognized as fully human beings with the right to vote, get an education, and to own finances and property.

Likewise, atheists and other nonreligious people are putting their voice out there. Over time, their voices will become familiar. The less rigidly closed-minded population will recognize the logic of their arguments, protests, and insistence for equal rights. As they become aware of us as human beings with high moral values, rather than immoral cold-blooded devils, prejudice will grow less pronounced, and over the decades and generations this will breed tolerance and eventually acceptance.

Originally posted by Ex-COG:

I agree that atheists, agnostics,the non-religious and even liberally minded religious folks need to make their presence known. As long as they remain hidden, fundamentalists will remain in control by spreading lies about "unbelievers". I'm not sure that we can always avoid being called arrogant or angry, even if we live our lives calmly and rationally. I think that any time the fundamentalists perceive a challenge (as they surely view the current crop of books being published by Harris, Dawkins, and others) they interpret it as evidence of anger. It's part of "demonizing" the "enemy".

I personally prefer a more quiet and peaceful method than just "laying it on the line" or "getting in your face" about my lack of fundamentalist Christian belief. I just continue to live as I always do--helping others, keeping in contact with family, visiting and hanging out with friends (even one from my former evangelical church), giving my ideas and support when someone asks for advice. If religion is brought up, I don't blurt out "Well, I'm an agnostic..."; I just give an opinion or comment, and go with the flow of the conversation. If what I say bothers the person, I might even try to introduce Bible verses or teachings of Jesus that support my position, or at least seem to refute what they are trying to say. For instance, if someone is against others for their race or nationality or another difference (from themself), I remind them of the verse that says God is no respecter of persons. If they try to defend some action against others that I think is abusive or mean (we all know the fundies are good at that!), I ask them if they believe in the Golden Rule, and if they want to be treated in such a manner. This doesn't always work, but maybe it makes them think. Sometimes, I've lost my temper and gone overboard. Once I had an email "battle" with a nephew and a brother, when they kept sending emails to everyone loaded with "Christianese" and praise of the present mixture of religion and nationalism in American politics. I don't think it was productive, and no doubt has me on the prayer list of every fundy family member's church!

I also think we might need to "pick our battles". Every little thing doesn't need to be challenged, just that which encroaches on our rights and liberties. For example, I don't get upset when someone says "God bless you" for sneezing, or intones that God will bless me for my generosity when I've given them a present. Those are simple expressions that many in our culture use, and I can live with. Of course, we all have different lines that we draw, and some might be offended by the bless you's. So we will all have different reactions and solutions to what we need to do.

What I don't understand (from the original post) is why some non-religious people would agree with the fundy attacks on the likes of Dawkins and Harris. Do they feel that by doing so, the fundies will leave them alone, considering these non-religious as safer than those considered on the attack? Are they afraid that the atheists speaking out forcefully will draw Christian attention to them? I'm not sure what to make of this.

I see! That would make sense. I was totally baffled that people judge me solely on my lack of belief rather than by my actions.



Me too. It's just the way I am. It feels all wrong to impose my personal views on them. If a person needs help they don't need to be preached at, regardless of ideology--religious or secular.



I've used this method for self-defense with a family member I used to be close to. I suggested she commit me to God's care, since she believes that God communicates directly with humans via the Holy Ghost. I am not sure how good she felt about it but she got the message not to write any more sermon letters to me.



Maybe. This is twisting scripture to use it against themselves. I tried this with another family member I was not close with. She didn't say it in so many words but I got the feeling she was thinking: So that is the extent to which you have sold yourself to Satan. Okay I won't waste any more time on you.



How wonderful to be so popular! (take this with the intended irony)


That's what I don't understand.

I'm part of a conversation on exC about speaking out for atheist sections in bookstores. I wrote up a hypothetical or imaginary conversation I might have with a bookstore. (It has never happened and I have no idea if the local bookstores and libraries carry the books of Dawkins, et al.) It helped me see that if we don't want to compromise ourselves there might be a limit to how much we speak out and in what context. I'll post part of that post here:

ME: Where is your Atheist section?

Bookstore: We don't have any.

ME: I mean, where do I look for God Delusion?

Bookstore: Sorry we don't carry that kind of books.

ME: You know, the book Richard Dawkins wrote last year. He's the biologist from Oxford University and he's been all over the world promoting it. Where do I buy it?

Bookstore, sounding a bit impatient: I'm sorry but we don't carry Dawkins' books. I know what you're talking about but we don't carry it.

ME (I'd probably back down at the point but on the off-chance that I would give it another try): But this is a land of religious freedom--which also means freedom from religion. And we in this city esp. with so many international students celebrate diversity. How come you don't have an atheist section?

Bookstore: calls management

Manager: Hi, how may I help you?

ME: I'm just looking for Richard Dawkins's God Delusion. Where do I get it?

Manager: I wouldn't know but we don't carry it.

ME: May I know why not? I thought this was a land of religious freedom--which also means freedom from religion. And we in this city esp. with so many international students celebrate diversity. We have many East Asian students and immigrants. They are secular. When will you have an atheist section?

Manager: That's just the way it is. Maybe if you go online you can find something.

ME: When will you have an atheist section in here?

Manager, visibly impatient: This is just a branch store. You will have to contact our main offices. Look, I have to go. Go online and see what you can find. [walks away]

Honestly, knowing myself as I do, I would not take it this far. This last exchange would not happen unless I personally knew the manager, OR if I was in another city in a bookstore where I never ever expected to do business again. I would fear getting black-mailed as a customer.

Originally posted by Ex-COG here.



I don't think you would have much trouble if you were in a large national chain bookstore like Borders, or Barnes and Noble. They do have such items on the shelves, and if not are always willing to order an item for you. Even if an individual clerk or manager was critical of you and your choices, they would be less likely to openly show this, as you even could go as far as reporting to the corporate headquarters if you felt discriminated against. To headquarters, the bottom line is what counts, and they usually don't want bad publicity and the possible loss of customers.

Smaller, independent bookstores might be more of a problem. If it's in a small, conservative and highly religious area, they may not carry books like this because there won't be a demand for them, in addition to the possibility the owners don't agree with the books in question. Whether they order them for you or not will depend on how professional they are. I'd think in most cases they would order them, though they might point and gossip about you behind your back if they were the prejudiced sort. That wouldn't matter if you live in a different town, but if you were part of that community it could come back to bite you. Small towns have big ears.

So, are books by Harris, Dawkins and others like them actually placed in an area called "atheist"? I never paid attention to what the shelf section was called. Now I'll have to go to the bookstore and find out, I'm curious!

Here's the link to the discussion on exC.

I tried emailing the person who posted Jonathan Edwards
sermon but it didn't go through so I'll post it here:

I have just now completed reading The Justice of God in the Damnation of Sinners. (See PDF Document) Jonathan Edwards thinks he is speaking to people like me but he does not even address the problems many of us have with Christianity. I am sure I would have had the same problem two centuries ago when he was speaking in the flesh.

Christians today talk exactly like Edwards talked back then. Like him, they assume they know all the problems "sinners" have with the faith and they preach long and loud regarding those problems. When I tell what my real problem is they just spit it in my face that I have to take things on faith.

I will no longer lie. I will no longer profess to believe something that makes no sense in my brain. When I say "I believe" I mean it makes sense in my brain. That is what most people mean by "I believe." But Christians forego logic when it comes to the faith. Jesus condemned the man who buried his talent. Yet Christians will dig deeper and ever deeper to bury their intellectual talents. The one goal is to hold onto something that makes no sense. They call it faith.

I would rather be rejected of humanity than lie about holy matters. If you think I am lying you kid no one but yourself. If you listen with open ears to the many people who have deconverted for the sake of personal integrity you cannot help but realize we are for real. If you reject our testimonies (as Christians normally do) you prove that you hate the truth because we are telling the truth about our own personal lives.

If you go to exChristian.net you can read the Testimonies of Former Christians.

Originally posted by Varokhar here.

Xianity hasn't been pushed halfway into the grave with non-spoken criticism. If no one speaks out against its flaws and promotes something better, no progress can hope to be made.

According to adherents.com a third (2.1 billion) of the human population is Christian, and another three or four billion people are other religions, and only 1.1 billion people (about 1/6 of the human population) are nonreligious. It's not as though we godless heathens are going to take over the world by about tomorrow night. The Muslims, who are just over half as many people as Christians, are the only viable religious enemy of the Christians. Muslim-Christian animosity goes back about a thousand years so I guess it's not as though they will make the peace by about tomorrow night, either.

It is true that the people who want to "save the world for Jesus in this generation" are in the minority because many Christians do not share that particular belief. The problem with that slogan is that it was spoken at least one or two generations ago. It seems Jesus was not quite strong enough to make it come true. The Christian religion does not yet dominate the world completely. Maybe that's their problem.

What they don't take into consideration is that in World Wars 1 and 2 Christians were fighting Christians. Whether or not Adolph Hitler was a "true" Christian may be debatable, but the majority of Christian Churches in his jurisdiction supported him. If we look at the religions Hitler might have been he was more Christian than anything else. Thus, we know that converting the world to Jesus in this, or any other, generation is not going to solve the world's problems.